Allow me to start by thanking you for entrusting me with this responsibility as Vice President of the Diocesan Fiscal Management Conference and Chairman of the Program Planning Committee. For 10 years now, DFMC has been a part of my life. This is my second term on the DFMC Board of Directors, and it is an honor to serve as an officer of the Board this year.
Upcoming Webinars
Interested in earning
2CPE
Presented by James Bierstaker, Professor of Accounting, Villanova School of Business
Thursday,April3,2025
3:00pm-4:40pmEDT
Presented by Professor Mary Njal
Wednesday,April30,2025
2:00pm-4:00pmEDT
DIOCESAN FISCAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
OFFICE:
625 W. Deer Valley Rd., Ste. 103-410
Phoenix, AZ 85027
602-992-2900
Email: dfmc@dfmconf.org
Over the course of the past decade, I have enjoyed watching this organization grow and flourish. Our membership is larger today than ever before and includes members from across North America and other parts of the world. Our annual meetings have deepened offerings; be they spiritual, professional development, or social. The expansion of our CPE-granting educational program in recent years has been a welcome development. Through webinars, self-study courses on our website, and attendance at the DFMC Conference Annual Meeting, most if not all annual CPE requirements can be obtained through DFMC memberships for every Diocesan Fiscal Officer and every diocesan staff member. Activity on our members-only message board and document library is as robust as ever, and brand-new regional meetings are launching to compliment the many existing ones – all of which are flourishing.
As I reported to the DFMC membership in San Diego last Fall at the conclusion of my term as Treasurer, our organization is in excellent financial shape. We steward greater assets than ever before, enjoy rising income balanced by appropriate controls on expenses, and publish a clean audit each year. Our investment portfolio is posting excellent returns, and we monitor it to ensure that it does so in alignment with Christian morality and the teachings of our Catholic faith.
When we gathered in Nashville in 2021, the DFMC Board and our management team presented a forward vision for this organization. First, DFMC will actively encourage a more devoted practice of the Catholic faith amongst its members, as called
for in our constitution and as appropriate for senior lay executives within the Church. Secondly, the DFMC annual meeting event will deliver at an extremely high level each year and at spectacular venues, host an elite conference faculty, and provide memorable experiences for members and guests to share. Third, opportunities for DFMC members to enjoy continued value from their membership between annual meetings will expand. This focus on the fundamentals that have sustained DFMC for 55 years has served us well: the 2024 San Diego annual meeting was by nearly every measure the most successful DFMC event ever. We saw very high member registration and external support. Packed Masses, long lines at Confession, and a crowded Adoration Chapel revealed the authentic character of a diocesan professional and servant of the Church, and the unique qualities of the people called to this vocation.
As a well-established institution within the Church and home for some of her most distinguished leaders, we seek to celebrate the rich legacy of service in the DFMC. In 2022, we launched the Saint Matthew Medal: the top award presented by our organization recognizing zeal for Catholic evangelization, leadership in the profession, and giving back to others. The inaugural recipient of the Saint Matthew Medal – Jan Smith – embodied these qualities fully over the course of her storied 40-year career and many years as a top-level DFMC strategist and governor. In 2023, Tony Salgado received the second Saint Matthew Medal. Last year, Dr. Wayne Lenell became the third St. Matthew Medal honoree. This type of recognition is appropriate and complimentary to our Mission focus and provides models for each of us to spire towards.
I am excited for the year to come! Many lessons we took away from the San Diego Conference will be applied to the 55th Annual DFMC Conference September 28th-October 1st, 2025 at the Marriott Philadelphia Downtown. Please mark your calendars now for the Philadelphia Conference, and if possible bring your team from your office, and remember spouses or family members are welcome and encouraged to accompany you. We have listened to you and accordingly, have expanded the opportunities for participation for these family members in
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Jo Willhite President Archdiocese of Portland in Oregon
Keith Parsons Vice President Archdiocese of Denver
Shirley Pajanor
Treasurer Diocese of San Diego
Dn. Eric Simontis
Secretary Diocese of San Jose
Most Rev. James R. Golka
Episcopal Moderator Diocese of Colorado Springs
John Matthew Knowles Executive Director
Mac Bryant Diocese of Bridgeport
Carolyn Callahan Diocese of Jackson
Cecilia Colbert Diocese of Dallas
Marc Fisher
Archdiocese of Philadelphia
Michael McGee Diocese of Richmond
Carla Mills Archdiocese of Kansas City in Kansas
Jorge Montenegro Diocese of San Bernardino
Debbie Swisher Diocese of Lexington
CONTINUED FROM PAGE 1
Message From The Vice President
the Conference. Philadelphia is a great place to visit with its rich history and vibrant downtown, and we want your family to also be able to enjoy it.
In closing, let me first thank our esteemed Board of Directors and our President Jo Wilhite, our Episcopal Moderator James Golka, and the DFMC Staff. We have a terrific team of smart, creative, hard-working people that love the Church and recognize the importance of professional services supporting it. Know that each of us thinks every day about how to help you succeed professionally, form strong relationships with your colleagues, and deepen your faith. Your membership and involvement in DFMC are appreciated and valued. Thank you for trusting us with the governance of this great association. I wish you and your family all the blessings available throughout this coming Lenten season, and a Happy Easter thereafter.
God Bless, Keith Parsons
Welcome to the DFMC!
Please give a warm welcome to recent members to the DFMC.
You can send them a welcome note on the DFMC Member Portal.
• Ms. Robin Austin, Chief Financial Officer, Lake Charles
• Mr. Tom Cole, Acctg/Fin. Support/Auditor, Grand Rapids
• Rev. Msgr. T. Condon, Vicar Gen & Mod , of the Curia, Paterson
• Mr. Philip Creider, Asset Manager, Tulsa and Eastern Oklahoma
• Ms. Jennifer DeLisle, Accounting Manager, Richmond
• Mr. Rob Eib, Dir. Of Real Estate & Construction, Manchester
• Mr. John Fraase, Assistant Controller, Bismarck
• Ms. Megan Gerome, Controller, Dir. of Finance-CCF, Cleveland
• Ms. Megan Gibney, Sr. Business Analyst, Newark
• Mr. Chris Hagen, Dir. of Human Resources, Manchester
• Ms. Nina Kondysar, Director Accounting, Santa Rosa
• Mr. Kevin Krencisz, Chief Financial Officer, Cleveland
• Ms. Teresita Laquian, Accountant, Chalan Kanoa
• Fr. John Larochelle, Episcopal Vicar for Fiscal Affairs, Worcester
• Ms. Lisa Melanson, Controller, Manchester
• Mr. Bob Moore, Controller, St. Louis
• Mr. John Moschella, Controller, Diocese of Paterson
• Ms. Nancy Oviedo, Internal Auditor, Kansas City in KS
• Mr. Pale' Ron Pangan, Director of Youth, Agana
• Mr. Andrew Pease, General Counsel, Lincoln
• Mr. Greg Pope, Chief Administrative Officer, Nashville
• Ms. Melissa Seeger, Controller, Saginaw
• Dn. Arthur Stockstill, Business Mgr., Ordinariate, Chair of St. Peter
• Mr. Adam Thieneman, Parish Business Support, Louisville
• Ms. Denise Watson, Catholic Schools Business Mgr., Burlington
New Member Update as of 02/28/2025
Are you ready for “Make America Healthy Again”? Predicting Trump’s impact on Catholic health plans
by Eric Allen Kauk, Esq., LL.M. Catholic Benefits Law
Predictions are Silly.
Humans love to predict the future:
• In 1883, Lord Kelvin claimed "X-rays will prove to be a hoax."
• In 1943, Thomas Watson (IBM Chairman) said "there is a world market for maybe five computers."
• In 1966, Time Magazine predicted "Remote shopping, while entirely feasible, will flop.”
But we are remarkably poor at it.
Below I offer issues that are likely to impact Catholic health plans over the next four years. But, instead of looking at them as predictions from a magical crystal ball, its more useful to use them to start a conversation at your diocese that can help you prepare to address these issues in a manner that shows your forward thinking and well-reasoned approach.
While it may be futile to try to predict the future…it is dangerous to ignore an issue just because there’s uncertainty. It is better to be aware of and informed about these issues. It is best to have a written position ready ahead of time. So, I offer these issues with great humility (and a wink) because it’s tough to make predictions…especially about the future.
In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) Mandates Will Prove to Be Merely a Trump Campaign Promise.
In early 2024, when Trump was seeking support from moderates, he issued a statement on his social media platform, Truth Social, saying “I strongly support the availability of IVF for couples who are trying to have a precious baby.”
This statement sent shockwaves through the Catholic healthcare world. Many of us now have a watchful eye on Trump as he enters a four-year presidential term where he may not be accountable because no longer needs to be concerned with getting future votes.
Many believe that Trump’s statements on IVF signal his support pivoting away from traditional religious values. Some believe that Trump will betray us by forcing all health plans to cover IVF.
I disagree. In the same statement, Trump provided a crucial hint that he is happy to leave the IVF issue to the individual states, “[I am] calling on the Alabama Legislature to act quickly to find an immediate solution to preserve the availability of IVF in Alabama.”
He then went further with pro-life conservative values, saying: "The Republican Party should always be on the side of the Miracle of Life — and the side of Mothers, Fathers, and their Beautiful Babies,” Trump has a history of deferring these issues to state law, and he also has been a strong advocate for religious exemptions.
IVF mandates are likely to remain merely one of Trump’s campaign-trail talking points that, and even if mandates are issued, this administration will provide religious exemptions broadly.
Trump Will Restore Limitations on Stem Cell Research
The Trump administration is likely to restore restrictions on using tissue from aborted fetuses for biomedical research (restrictions lifted by Biden.) When embryonic stem cells and other fetal tissue research leads to large-scale or commercial treatments, the demand for tissue from abortions increases. Trump will stop this immoral research.
Trump Will Require Transparency from Pharmacy Benefit Managers (PBM)
Sponsors of ERISA health plans legally must pay only reasonable compensation to entities providing goods and services to the plan. To prove that PBM fees meet the definition of “reasonable” Trump may require PBMs to reveal all direct and indirect compensation, including compensation paid among related parties such as subcontractors and advisory services. While ERISA does not apply to church plans, not all churches have church plans, so this could improve the transparency of these costs for ERISA plan sponsors.
USA Today - NBCU photo bank
“Make America Healthy Again”
Trump Will Expand the Use of Health Savings Accounts (HSAs)
The Trump administration has plans to expand HSAs, including offering more flexibility and tax savings, such as increasing contribution limits, letting HSA funds cover insurance premiums, improving employer contributions, and allowing HSAs to cover more preventive care services.
Trump Will Renew the Safe Habor for High-deductible Health Plans (HDHP)
Trump is likely to allow HDHP sponsors to cover telehealth and remote care services on a first dollar coverage basis to participants with an HSA. This is likely to come via an extension of an administration action that Biden set to end in 2025.
Trump Will Order the Department of Justice (DOJ) to
Abandon Its Position in U.S. V. Skrmetti.
Here, the Biden administration found and supported three plaintiffs, in challenging Tennessee Senate Bill 1 (SB1), which prohibits medical treatments that advance gender transitions for minors. This is the first time the Supreme Court has directly considered how the Equal Protection Clause applies to genderaffirming care for minors. (This may not end the case, because there are ways that the plaintiffs may move forward without the DOJ’s involvement.) The outcome of this case could have significant implications for similar laws in over twenty other states targeting transgender healthcare.
There Will Be an Increase in Challenges to Federal Agency Rulemaking
The U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo overturned longstanding “Chevron” deference given to administrative agencies in the rulemaking process. During the next four years we are likely to see a dramatic increase in legal challenges to health plan and benefits regulations and rules made by the HHS, DOL, and IRS. There is no longer an unfair deference given to the government agency position. Now challengers to federal agency-made rules and regulations start with a level playing field.
Tariffs on China Will Cause Higher Generic Drug Costs
Tariffs on Chinese imports are likely to have significant effects on active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) because China provides about 60% of APIs used in the U.S. Tariffs may also exacerbate existing drug shortages in the U.S., making it harder for patients to acquire these medications. The generic drug market could face further pressure if manufacturers exit the market, reducing competition and increasing generic drug prices.
Start the Conversation Now
To prepare for these issues, CFOs need only to raise the question in an informed way. To do so, first evaluate your diocese’s current position. If the diocese has not articulated a position, I suggest that CFOs contact the Catholic Benefits Association, the National Catholic Bioethics Center, and their employee benefits attorney
to become personally informed on the issues. Then the CFO should meet with Bishop to discuss the issue in an informed way. The CFO should come to that meeting with a concise (one paragraph) written suggestion for the diocese’s position. After stating the diocese’s position, these issues can be easily prepared for. The key to being prepared for Trump’s impact on Catholic health plans is not to try to predict the future like Carnac the Magnificent…it is far easier, you simply must: Start the conversation now.
Eric has spent the last 16 years advising Catholic Archdioceses, Dioceses, Religious Orders, sponsored ministries, and educational institutions on Church Plan and employee benefits issues. His unique combination of perspectives as an accountant, licensed insurance agent, and highly specialized attorney allows him to provide practical and meaningful advice to help diocesan CFOs. Kauk's commitment to service extends beyond his professional work. He has been an active volunteer and board member for numerous charitable organizations, including the American Red Cross, Make-A-Wish foundation, and local non-profit food pantries in the greater Tampa area.
ERIC ALLEN KAUK, ESQ., LL.M. Catholic Benefits Law
Calling on the Family Farm Mindset
by Jeanette Fast Redmond
“I give people the proper respect,” says Dan Placke, chief financial officer for the Diocese of Cheyenne. “At end of day, we’re all family. My upbringing brought all that to the table for me.”
The diocese serves the entire state of Wyoming including Yellowstone National Park. The area is vast—but population is small, at only 50,000 Catholics. So this home mission diocese daily confronts the unique challenge of serving a vast area with the modest resources and funding of a smaller diocese.
Thankfully, Dan understands the people and the challenges of a large rural area, having grown up on a diversified family farm in Nebraska. There, he says, “God came first, family second, and then our farm was close behind.” That was where he first learned to make solid connections with co-workers and customers alike, despite being a self-professed introvert.
“We had a produce stand during the summer,” he says. “I waited on customers that came from throughout the US and beyond since I was a little kid, and you just knew how to treat people with a ‘customer always comes first’ attitude. You learned how to have good intelligent conversations with people.”
“My family is very much solid in our Catholic faith and the way we were raised,” he adds. “We would make sure we got to church when we were supposed to, no matter what was going on.” Indeed, his mother recently passed away on the Feast of the Immaculate Conception in December 2024—at Sunday Mass. “I was always so proud to tell my mom how I work for the diocese,” he says.
Dan’s wife, Leslie, grew up nearby and is also deeply familiar with rural life. In fact, the two were born a day apart at the same Nebraska hospital, where they were briefly mixed up by the nurses.
“Back in the day,” he explains, “they went around with the babies on those little carts for feeding time. Well, my mom was given her [Leslie] and quickly knew, ‘No, I had a boy.’ Somehow the nurse gave her the wrong baby, and that baby became my wife 21 years later.”
“We didn’t officially meet each other until freshman year in high school despite having mutual relatives from different sides of the family. She sat behind me at the convocation for the opening day, and I just felt like I knew her.” Small wonder that Dan considers Leslie the most important person in his life. “We dated only each other through high school and college, got married, and have been blessed with three daughters, three sonsin-law, and seven grandchildren.”
Dan graduated from the University of Nebraska at Kearney, earning a bachelor of science degree in business administration with an accounting emphasis. Upon graduation, he joined
Mutual of Omaha’s financial accounting development program, with the small group rotating job positions through different departments every four months or so.
“We got a good, well-rounded taste of different things,” Dan says. But when he realized that insurance was “not thrilling” him, he transitioned into a controller job for an agriculture company in central Nebraska. Then he was hired by an organic dairy company in northern Colorado, where he and Leslie moved to raise their family.
“I was able to match my agriculture and business interests with my financial operational interests, and it was an evolving career for me that was wonderful,” he says.
After more than two decades at the dairy company in varying management roles, Dan became interested in running his own business. When the International Pilgrim Virgin Statue of Our Lady of Fatima Tour came to his parish in 2017, he spent time praying before the statue and asking for guidance. The next day, he learned of a business that needed someone like him to invest in it and financially run it for a few years.
That experience made him realize that once he sold that business three years later, in 2020, he wanted to work for the Church. He discovered CatholicJobs.com, where right away he found CFO job openings with Catholic organizations.
“The second opening I looked into was this one [in Cheyenne],” he says, “and it was the perfect setup for me because I’m all about accounting. I don’t enjoy managing the HR side of things if I can help it. The person we have here in charge of HR is amazing, and it’s the perfect setup. They needed true accounting skills here, and that’s what I brought in.”
“When they were interviewing me,” he says, “they asked me what I wanted to accomplish in the first 90 days. And I said, ‘Well, I want to make sure I get to every parish.’ And I don’t want to tell you how few I’ve gone to so far in the last four and a half years, because of COVID-19 initially but after that just the workload.”
“When I worked for the dairy, we had different dairies in different states. So I would travel routinely to go to do varying accounting and operational audit work among my other management duties. So that’s what I thought I would do here,” he explains. But [here] you don’t have the bandwidth to go in and see these people routinely like we made sure we did in the corporate world. Therefore, unfortunately I must rely more on remotely helping the parishes rather than physically being there.”
“That said, a lot of these parishes are smaller, and so you don’t generally have the more complicated problems the larger diocese might have.” He says that makes him a better fit for Cheyenne’s needs.
“I wouldn’t be the right fit for some of those larger dioceses that have a tremendous number of other organizations they’re also responsible for. I’d want this role here because it’s so accounting-oriented and because we’re such a small staff. I enjoy rolling up my sleeves with my chancery family,” he says.
DAN PLACKE Diocese of Cheyene
“I oversee my awesome staff doing our accounts payable and receivable. In terms of the general ledger, I’d like to get it to where I can offload and grow my staff in that area, but our budget doesn’t allow for that presently. Further, they, too, are very busy assisting with our current diocesan-wide capital campaign.” He adds, “I also do the grant writing and reporting for the Catholic Home Missions annual process, the Catholic Extension Society, all those things.”
“People are already independent because of the mindset here” in Wyoming, he adds. So his rural upbringing, customer service orientation, and experience working for a corporation with multiple locations have all helped Dan forge connections with the parishes he serves across the state—using Zoom when in-person meetings are made difficult by distance.
“I’m confident that God brought me here,” he says. “I have a purpose here and I couldn’t be happier serving our diocese.”
PLATINUM SPONSOR
•
• Legal & Morally-Correct
Eric Allen Kauk, Esq., LL.M. (813)203-0208
eric.kauk@CatholicBenefitsLaw.com
ww w.CatholicBenefitsLaw.com
PLATINUM SPONSOR
CDFM online prep courses are available for the 16 test areas!
These are excellent courses that will help you succeed on the exam.
The deadline to register for the exam is October 1, 2025.
The CDFM Exam is a challenging, thorough test of knowledge across sixteen core competencies. Those who attain the CDFM distinguish themselves as extremely well qualified within the profession, and enjoy commiserate peer recognition as a result.
DFMC and Villanova Center for Church Management have invested in these preparation courses to ensure that you have all you need to prepare for and pass the CDFM Exam.
Below is a sampling of the 16 prep courses.
Join those DFMC colleagues who have successfully achieved this professional certification by submitting your application to sit for the CDFM examination to the DFMC National Office by October 1, 2025.
The Certified Diocesan Fiscal Manager credential represents the pinnacle qualification for a diocesan financial executive.
2025 MEMBE R LIST Supporting Each Other
AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES
Maitland-Newcastle
BAHAMAS
NEW PROVIDENCE
Nassau
CANADA
ALBERTA
Calgary
BRITISH COLUMBIA
Vancouver
ONTARIO
Hamilton
St. Catharines
Toronto
UNITED STATES
ALABAMA
Birmingham Mobile
ALASKA
Anchorage-Juneau
Fairbanks
ARIZONA
Phoenix
Phoenix (Byzantine Eparchy)
Tucson
ARKANSAS
Little Rock
CALIFORNIA
Fresno
Los Angeles
Monterey
Nareg (Eparchy) Oakland
Orange
Sacramento
San Bernardino
San Diego
San Francisco
San Jose
Santa Rosa
Stockton
COLORADO
Colorado Springs Denver
Pueblo
CONNECTICUT
Bridgeport
Hartford
Norwich
Stamford(Ukrainian Eparchy)
DELAWARE
Wilmington
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Military Services, USA
USCCB
Washington
FLORIDA
Miami
Orlando
Palm Beach
Pensacola-Tallahassee
St. Augustine
St. Petersburg
Venice
GEORGIA
Atlanta
Savannah
GUAM
Agana
HAWAII
Honolulu
IDAHO
Boise
ILLINOIS
Belleville
Chicago (Syro-Malabar Eparchy)
Chicago (Ukrainian Eparchy)
Joliet in Illinois
Peoria
Rockford
Springfield in Illinois
INDIANA
Evansville
Fort Wayne-South Bend
Gary
Indianapolis
Lafayette in Indiana
IOWA
Davenport
Des Moines
Dubuque
Sioux City
KANSAS
Dodge City
Kansas City in Kansas
Salina
Wichita
KENTUCKY
Covington
Lexington
Louisville
Owensboro
LOUISIANA
Alexandria in Louisiana
Baton Rouge
Houma-Thibodaux
Lafayette in Louisiana
Lake Charles
New Orleans
Shreveport
MAINE
Portland in Maine
MARYLAND
Baltimore
MASSACHUSETTS
Boston
Fall River
Newton (Melkite)
Springfield in Massachusetts
Worcester
MICHIGAN
Detroit
Gaylord
Grand Rapids
Kalamazoo
Lansing
Marquette
Michigan Catholic Conference
Saginaw
Saint Thomas the Apostle
MINNESOTA
Crookston
Duluth
New Ulm
St. Cloud
St. Paul-Minneapolis
Winona-Rochester
MISSISSIPPI
Biloxi
Jackson
MISSOURI
Jefferson City
Kansas City - St. Joseph
Lebanon (Eparchy)
Saint Louis
SpringfieldCape Girardeau
MONTANA
Great Falls-Billings
Helena
NEBRASKA
Grand Island
Lincoln
Omaha
NEVADA
Las Vegas
Reno
NEW HAMPSHIRE
Manchester
NEW JERSEY
Camden
Metuchen
Newark
Passaic (Eparchy)
Paterson
Trenton
NEW MEXICO
Gallup
Las Cruces
Santa Fe
NEW YORK
Albany
Brooklyn
Buffalo
New York
Odensburg
Rochester
Syracuse
NORTH CAROLINA
Charlotte
Raleigh
NORTH DAKOTA
Bismarck
Fargo
NORTHERN MARIANA
ISLANDS
Chalan Kanoa
OHIO
Canton (Romanian Eparchy)
Cincinnati
Cleveland
Columbus
Parma (Byzantine Eparchy)
Parma (Ukrainian Eparchy)
Steubenville
Toledo
Youngstown
OKLAHOMA
Oklahoma City
Tulsa
OREGON
Baker
Portland in Oregon
PENNSYLVANIA
Allentown
Altoona-Johnstown
Erie
Greensburg
Harrisburg
Philadelphia
Philadelphia (Ukrainian Eparchy)
Pittsburgh
Pittsburgh (Byzantine Eparchy)
Scranton
PUERTO RICO
Arecibo
Fajardo Humacao Ponce
San Juan
RHODE ISLAND
Providence
SOUTH CAROLINA
Charleston
SOUTH DAKOTA
Rapid City
Sioux Falls
TENNESSEE
Knoxville
Memphis
Nashville
TEXAS
Amarillo
Austin
Beaumont
Brownsville
Corpus Christi
Dallas
El Paso
Fort Worth
Galveston-Houston
Houston, Ordinariate of the Chair of St. Peter
Laredo
Lubbock
San Angelo
Tyler
Victoria in Texas
UTAH
Salt Lake City
VERMONT
Burlington
VIRGINIA
Arlington
Richmond
WASHINGTON
Seattle
Spokane
Yakima
WEST VIRGINIA
Wheeling-Charleston
WISCONSIN
Green Bay
La Crosse
Madison
Milwaukee
Superior
WYOMING
Cheyenne
Making retirement benefits more beneficial
At
Financial, we provide a wide range of employer-sponsored retirement plans for organizations of all sizes and sectors. But we don’t stop there. Our tools and services help simplify the entire benefits process for employees and plan sponsors. From personalized technology to one-on-one support, we make it easier to manage competing priorities, boost contributions and face retirement with confidence.
CBIS is a Catholic investment firm whose mission is to serve Catholic investors looking to transform the world.
A TRUSTED PARTNER FOR CATHOLIC INSTITUTIONS GLOBALLY AND THEIR CONSULTANTS SINCE 1981 www.cbisonline.com | 877-550-2247
CAPTRUST’s Team Schott is proud to be ranked on the Barron’s Top 100 Institutional Consulting list for the sixth year in a row!
We look forward to seeing everyone at the DFMC in Philadelphia!
& Foundations • Deposit & Loan Funds
Valuable Insight to Help You Change Lives
Today, there are countless complex regulatory, accounting, and tax requirements — and they are constantly changing.
With over 50 years of serving religious and nonprofit organizations, we provide tailored strategies to help your diocese thrive in a changing world.
Federal Litigation
United States Supreme Court 2025 Term: Cases to Watch
For the 2025-26 term, the United States Supreme Court (SCOTUS) has so far granted certiorari in four critical cases relating to issues of pro-life, religious liberty, education, and religious tax exemptions. Below are brief summaries.
Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic
In 2018, by way of executive order, the state of South Carolina determined that Planned Parenthood was no longer qualified to receive taxpayer funding as part of its Medicaid program and thus planned to cease Medicaid funding to the abortion provider. Planned Parenthood sued South Carolina Department of Health and Human Services in federal district court, which then forced the state to permanently restore Planned Parenthood funding.
On appeal at the Fourth Circuit, the court ruled against terminating Planned Parenthood as a qualified Medicaid provider. South Carolina petitioned the US Supreme Court to hear the case, which it granted and remanded back to the 4th Circuit for further consideration considering its recent decision in Health & Hosp. Corp. of Marion Cnty. v. Talevski. 599 U.S. 166 (202 3) (deciding that the free-choice-of-provider provision in the Medicaid Act creates individual rights enforceable via 42 U.S.C. §1983). Upon remand, the 4th Circuit again held against South Carolina, which then was appealed to the US Supreme Court again. On December 18, 2024, SCOTUS granted cert. The question presented to SCOTUS now is whether pro-life states can direct federal Medicaid funds away from abortion providers like Planned Parenthood.
Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board v. Drummond
St. Isidore of Seville Virtual Catholic School, supported by the Archdiocese of Oklahoma City and the Diocese of Tulsa, contracted with the state of Oklahoma to become a charter school and receive public funding.
Because the school is Catholic, the Attorney General of Oklahoma sought to cancel the contract between Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board (OSCSB) and St. Isidore. The OSCSB refused reasoning that the Free Exercise Clause prohibits state officials from denying public funding to religious schools simply because they are religious. The AG filed suit against OSCSB to invalidate the contract. The AG contends that the contract, because it omitted standard provisions prohibiting religious affiliation and affirmed St. Isidore’s religious mission, violates the OK Constitution, Oklahoma Charter Schools Act, and the Establishment Clause of the US Constitution. The OK Supreme Court agreed with the State and held the contract violated state and federal law. OSCSB appealed to the US Supreme Court, and on January 24, 2025, the case was granted cert.
The issues presented to SCOTUS are questions of religious liberty, whether 1) privately owned and operated schools’ decisions are considered state action because the school has a contract with the state to provide free education to students; and 2) does the Free Exercise Clause prohibit, or does the Establishment Clause require, a state to exclude religious schools from the charter-school program. Currently, there is a circuit split concerning privately owned schools and state action that this case seeks to settle. Further, OSCSB argues that recent SCOTUS Free Exercise cases (Trinity Lutheran, Espinoza, and Carson) lend support that the OK Supreme Court’s decision violated the Free Exercise Clause. OSCSB is represented by Alliance Defending Freedom and St. Isidore (as an intervenor) is represented by Notre Dame Law School’s Religious Liberty Clinic.
Catholic Charities Bureau v. Wisconsin Labor & Industry Review Comm’n
Under Wisconsin law, nonprofits operated for a religious purpose can be exempted from the state unemployment insurance program, which provides financial assistance to those who lost their job. Catholic Charities Bureau in the Diocese of Superior applied for religious exemption for the state program to instead provide unemployment benefits from the Wisconsin Bishops’ Church Unemployment Pay Program (CUPP), but the state
GOLD SPONSOR
Unexpected challenges require new solutions
Now more than ever, we’re here for you. We continue to provide critical insurance services on behalf of Catholic Dioceses, and have been since 1928.
supreme court ruled that Catholic Charities could not receive the religious exemption. The ruling effectively severed Catholic Charities, the social ministry of the Diocese of Superior, from the Diocese and concluded Catholic Charities’ activities to not be religious in nature because the ministries serve everyone, not just Catholics. As a result, Catholic Charities cannot join the Wisconsin Catholic Church’s own program but must participate in the state’s program. Catholic Charities filed a petition for certiorari with the US Supreme court, and on December 13, 2024, SCOTUS agreed to hear the case on the question of whether the state law violates the First Amendment’s Religion Clauses in denying the religious tax exemption because the organization is not, in the state’s view, religious. The significance of this case directly impacts religious organizations’ right to exercise religious activities, including service the poor as a religious activity.
Mahmoud v. Taylor
In Maryland, Montgomery County Board of Education introduced new curriculum on inclusivity for pre-K through 8th grade students. The books part of the curriculum were about sexual orientations, transgender ideology, gender transitioning, pride parades, and pronoun preferences. It had been longstanding practice for parents to be given notice and an opportunity to opt their child out of the lesson. But in 2023, the School Board had revoked notices and opt outs for parents for these books, violating Maryland law, School Board policy, and advice from county elementary school principals.
Parents from multiple religious backgrounds (Muslims, Jews, Catholics, Protestants, Orthodox Christians) sued the School Board in federal district court arguing that the denial of notice and opt-out options violated their religious freedom and parental rights. The parents sought a preliminary injunction, which was denied, then appealed to the Fourth Circuit which affirmed
the district court’s denial. The parents petitioned the US Supreme Court for certiorari in September 2024, and on January 17, 2025. The issue before SCOTUS is whether public schools, by adopting such curriculum and compelling children to participate in instruction against their parents’ religious convictions (without notice or opt outs), thereby burden parents’ religious exercise. The case is to be heard this spring. –S.E.
See: Planned Parenthood S. Atl. v. Kerr, 95 F.4th 152 (4th Cir. 2024), cert. granted in part sub nom. Kerr v. Planned Parenthood, No. 23-1275, 2024 WL 5148085 (U.S. Dec. 18, 2024); Drummond ex rel. State v. Oklahoma Statewide Virtual Charter Sch. Bd., 2024 OK 53, 558 P.3d 1, cert. granted sub nom. OK Charter Sch. Bd. v. Drummond, No. 24-394, 2025 WL 288306 (U.S. Jan. 24, 2025), and cert. granted sub nom. St. Isidore of Seville Sch. v. Drummond, No. 24-396, 2025 WL 288308 (U.S. Jan. 24, 2025); Cath. Charities Bureau, Inc. v. Lab. & Indus. Rev. Comm'n, 2024 WI 13, 411 Wis. 2d 1, 3 N.W.3d 666, cert. granted sub nom. Cath. Charities Bureau, Inc. v. WI Lab. Rev. Comm'n, No. 24-154, 2024 WL 5100663 (U.S. Dec. 13, 2024), amended, No. 24-154, 2024 WL 5112872 (U.S. Dec. 16, 2024), and cert. granted in part sub nom. Cath. Charities Bureau, Inc. v. WI Lab. Rev. Comm'n, No. 24-154, 2024 WL 5112872 (U.S. Dec. 16, 2024); Mahmoud v. McKnight, 102 F.4th 191 (4th Cir. 2024), cert. granted sub nom. Mahmoud v. Taylor, No. 24-297, 2025 WL 226842 (U.S. Jan. 17, 2025)
GOLD SPONSOR
Nonprofit software with heart
Are the systems you use to manage your diocese blocking the flow of progress?
Federal District Court
Vacates
2024 Revisions to Title IX Regulation; Dept. of Education Announces Enforcement Will Take Place under 2020 Version
State attorneys general played a major role in the wave of litigation challenging the U.S. Department of Education’s 2024 Title IX Rule, which amended the Department’s Title IX regulations to define discrimination on the basis of sex to include sexual orientation and gender identity. In Tennessee v. Cardona, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky issued a preliminary injunction and stay in June of 2024 against the application of the 2024 Rule to Tennessee and other plaintiff states. After the Sixth Circuit upheld the ruling, the Department filed an emergency application with the Supreme Court, seeking a partial stay that would allow the majority of the rule to go into effect, save the challenged definition and two associated provisions of the rule. The Supreme Court denied the application.
On January 9, 2025, upon return of the case, the district court vacated the 2024 Rule, effective nationwide. The court held that the rule exceeds the Department’s authority under the Title IX statute, violates the Constitution, and is arbitrary and capricious.
Most central to the court’s ruling was its determination that the Title IX statute cannot be properly read to cover sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination – “there is nothing in the text or statutory design of Title IX,” the court wrote, to permit such an interpretation. The court said that the rule
SPONSOR
“reads Bostock far too broadly by importing its holding into the context of Title IX” despite the Bostsock Court expressly limiting its holding to hiring and firing under Title VII.
On February 4, 2025, the Department issued a Dear Colleague letter stating that the Department would enforce Title IX under its regulations as promulgated in 2020. The letter cited as its basis the vacatur in Tennessee and President Trump’s Executive Order “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government,” which directs federal agencies to enforce sexprotective laws in a manner that promote the understanding that sex is binary and immutable. –D.B.
Practice Point: While the vacatur of the 2024 Rule relieves the religious liberty and free speech threats associated with its definition of sex discrimination, the 2020 Rule still imposes significant and potentially costly procedural obligations. Meanwhile, a circuit split remains over whether the Title IX statute prohibits sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination.
The Diocese of Paterson, New Jersey sued the Department of State in August 2024 challenging the change of interpretation for EB-4 visa allocation that created a backlog for Special Immigrant Visas for Religious Workers. The federal government was planning to file a motion to dismiss the complaint based on deficiencies in the complaint and for failure to state a claim. However, the case was stayed on November 11, 2024, until December 31, 2024, pending a settled resolution between the parties and interested third parties. The parties submitted two joint status reports on settlement conversations, followed by a motion to stay the proceedings. On December 31, 2024, the Court extended the stay of proceedings until March 31, 2025. Additional status reports were filed February 1, 2025, and will continue to be filed every 2 weeks after that, so we will continue to keep you updated on this litigation. If no settlement is reached by March 31, 2025, there will be no further stays in the litigation. However, with the new administration, the federal government might take a different position when it comes to defending this rule change. –C.C.V.
See: The Roman Catholic Diocese of Paterson, New Jersey et al. v. Department of State, et al., 2:24-cv-08350 (D.N.J., Dec 31, 2024).
Fiercely
SPONSOR
Connect your people and your parishes
A centralized diocesan management system through ParishStaq provides unmatched data accessibility and insights to fuel giving and growth.
Scan QR code to learn more
USCCB, Other Religious Groups Urge Supreme Court to Uphold Texas Law that Requires Age Verification to Access Pornographic
Websites
On November 22, the USCCB and other religious organizations filed a joint amicus brief in the United States Supreme Court urging the Court to uphold a Texas law (H.B. 1181) that, to protect minors from harmful media, requires age verification to access pornographic websites.
Here is the brief’s Summary of Argument:
Amici are convinced the Fifth Circuit reached the correct result [in upholding H.B. 1181] and should be affirmed. They write separately to highlight two points.
First, in deciding this important case, the Court should bear in mind that many religious groups hold strong beliefs about the unique evils presented by pornography and therefore seek to support the efforts of parents—the backbone of religious communities—in fulfilling their sacred duty to protect their children from those evils. In an era when technological advancements make pornography available anytime and anywhere, religious parents need all the help they can get to protect their children. Parents’ attempts both to instill religious beliefs in their children and to protect their children from the evils of pornography are furthered by H.B. 1181 and similar laws.
Second, both this Court’s decisions and a sound history-and-tradition approach to interpreting the First Amendment caution against unduly cabining States’ ability to limit children’s exposure to pornography. For example, if Petitioners were correct that strict scrutiny applies to laws that (unlike H.B. 1181) genuinely burden adults’ ability to consume pornography, States could not readily give to “parents … who have … primary responsibility for children’s well-being … the support of laws designed to aid discharge of that responsibility.” Ginsberg v. New York, 390 U.S. 629, 639 (1968). Such a result would flout Ginsberg’s express holdings that (1) legislatures can “properly conclude” that parents are “entitled to the support” of laws that limit the exposure of pornography to children and (2) the resulting laws are subject only to rational-basis review. Ibid.
And here, Texas’ law easily passes such review— as well as any other standard—because it is narrowly tailored to help protect children from all the harms identified above. That it also protects children from enormous spiritual harm and facilitates religious parents’ ability to raise their children in their chosen faith is an important bonus.
Nor will reaffirming Ginsberg’s vitality weaken protection for First Amendment rights such as the freedom of speech and the free exercise of religion. Petitioners concede (at 3, 41-42) that the materials affected by Texas’ law are obscene, at least for children. And this Court has long held that the creation and viewing of obscenity falls outside the First Amendment’s ambit. So there is no genuine risk that affirming the Fifth Circuit’s decision will put this Court on a slippery slope that threatens genuine First Amendment rights.
Accordingly, the Court should affirm the decision below and, in so doing, reaffirm that—whatever flaws Ginsberg may have—it provides the legal standard by which laws like H.B. 1181 should be assessed.
The entire brief is available here
See: Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, No. 23-1122 (U.S.).
Requests for Religious Accommodation from COVID Vaccine Requirement Continue to Generate Litigation
On November 13, the Second Circuit issued the third of three opinions relating to New York City’s refusal to grant a religious accommodation from its COVID vaccine requirement.
In the present case, involving public sector employees who sought a religious exemption from the vaccine requirement, the court of appeals rejected a facial challenge but issued a mixed decision on as-applied challenges.
As to a handful of individual plaintiffs seeking a religious accommodation, the court of appeals concluded that the city had demonstrated an undue hardship because each individual is a classroom teacher who, under the present circumstances, cannot physically be in the classroom while unvaccinated without presenting a risk to the vulnerable and still primarily unvaccinated student population.
But the court reinstated the as-applied challenges of two individual plaintiffs.
Natasha Solon plausibly alleged that she was denied an accommodation under the city’s previous standard, which recognized exemption requests only for “recognized and established religious organizations,” which is likely an unconstitutional standard for evaluating requests for religious accommodations.
Heather Clark plausibly alleged that her accommodation request was denied on the ground that her religious beliefs were “too personal to count as properly religious,” which for similar reasons was reversible error. –M.M.
See: New Yorkers for Religious Liberty v. City of New York, 121 F.4th 448 (2d Cir. 2024).
Denying Historical Preservation Grants to Churches Violated Free Exercise Clause
From 2003 to 2017, churches and religious organizations with buildings of historic significance were eligible for, and received, historical preservation grants in New Jersey. But in 2018, in Freedom from Religion Foundation v. Morris Cnty. Bd. of Chosen Freeholders (FFRF), 181 A.3d 992, the New Jersey Supreme Court held that the Religious Aid Clause of the New Jersey Constitution bars the use of taxpayer funds to repair and restore churches for purposes of worship. The Religious Aid Clause states that “[n]o person shall … be obliged to pay … taxes, or other rates for building or repairing any church or churches, place or places of worship, or for the maintenance of any minister or ministry.” The distinction between religious status and religious use was key in FFRF. A group of churches in that case sought historic preservation funds for structures regularly used for religious worship and several church applicants noted that the funds were needed so that the structures could continue to be used for worship.
Plaintiffs Mendham Methodist Church (Mendham) and Zion Lutheran Church (Zion) separately applied to Morris County for historical preservation grants to repair their historic church buildings, which they regularly use for worship. Morris County Rule 5.6.4 states that “[a]ny property that is currently used for religious purposes or functions is ineligible” for a historical preservation grant. Relying on FFRF and Rule 5.6.4, county officials denied Mendham’s and Zion’s applications on the ground that church buildings are ineligible for historic preservation funding if they are “currently used for religious purposes or functions.”
Mendham and Zion sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violation of the Free Exercise Clause. The district court has now concluded that the plaintiffs are likely to prevail and has preliminarily enjoined county officials from denying the plaintiffs’ applications.
The U.S. Supreme Court has made clear that the government may not deny a generally available public benefit based on an otherwise eligible recipient’s exercise of religion. When it does, the exclusion is subject to strict scrutiny. Rule 5.6.4 fails strict scrutiny because it is not narrowly tailored. It states that any property currently used for religious purposes or functions is ineligible for a historic preservation grant. The rule does not limit funding to religious institutions to secular aspects of repair. Instead, it excludes the institutions from eligibility wholesale because they are religious institutions. It therefore likely violates the Free Exercise Clause. This does not mean that any restriction on taxpayer funding of religious institutions is unconstitutional, the court cautioned. A different version of the rule (e.g., one that prohibited taxpayer funding of purely religious iconography or purposes) may still pass muster under the Free Exercise Clause. But such a hypothetical narrower provision, the court acknowledged, was not presented in this case so there was no need to decide that question. –M.M.
See: Mendham Methodist Church v. Morris Cty., No. 23cv2347, 2024 WL 4903677 (D. N.J. Nov. 27, 2024).
Ninth Circuit Bars Application of Executive Order 14026, the Federal Contractor Wage Mandate
In 2021, President Biden issued Executive Order 14026 which required an increase in the minimum wage that federal contractors pay their employees. Five states (Arizona, Idaho, Indiana, Nebraska, and South Carolina) sued to challenge the Department of Labor (DOL) rule implementing EO 14026.
The district court dismissed the complaint and denied injunctive relief.
On November 5, the Ninth Circuit vacated the dismissal, vacated the denial of a preliminary injunction, and remanded for further proceedings. The court of appeals held that President Biden did not have the authority under the Procurement Act to implement the minimum wage mandate. Further, DOL’s implementation was arbitrary and capricious due to its failure to consider alternatives, such as a lower rate of salary increase or phasing in the increase over several years. While the Ninth Circuit’s decision does not invalidate EO 14026 or the DOL Rule outright, further relief from the district court on remand is anticipated.
Two other challenges to the federal contractor wage mandate are pending. One is to be heard by the Fifth Circuit. The other, a recent Tenth Circuit decision, has prompted the filing of a petition for certiorari. The Trump Administration is expected to provide further relief from EO 14026 and the DOL Rule, likely by rescinding the EO and declining to defend the wage mandate if taken by the Supreme Court. –S.E.
See: State of Nebraska v. Su, 121 F.4th 1 (9th Cir. 2024).
USCCB Files Comments on Proposed Regulation on HHS Contracts
On November 20, the USCCB filed comments on a proposed regulation, issued by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), that would forbid discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in services provided under HHS contracts.
The USCCB comments urge HHS to reject the proposed nondiscrimination requirements. “Even if the Department rejects this recommendation,” the comments add, “at a minimum [HHS] should acknowledge in the final … regulation that it lacks a general police power to regulate the health professions, and that its nondiscrimination requirements do not mandate or bar the provision of any specific type of treatment or care.”
The full text of the comments is available here.
See: 89 Fed. Reg. 80634 (Oct. 3, 2024).
USCCB Files Comments on Proposed Expansion of Contraceptive Mandate
On November 25, the USCCB filed comments on a proposed regulation, issued by HHS and two other federal departments, that would expand the federal contraceptive mandate to include over-the-counter (OTC) contraceptives.
The USCCB comments state:
[C]ontraceptives should not be mandated as “preventive” services because, unlike genuinely preventive services, they do not prevent disease or illness. Instead, they inhibit healthy, natural bodily functions and are associated with an increased risk of adverse health outcomes, such as breast cancer, that other “preventive services” are designed to prevent. Moreover, contrary to their intended purpose, the use of contraceptives in actual practice may increase rather than decrease the incidence of unplanned pregnancies. The contraceptive mandate, including the current proposal to expand the mandate to include OTC contraceptives, is therefore at odds with the purpose of the preventive services provision of the ACA [i.e., Affordable Care Act] upon which the mandate purports to be based. In addition, insofar as it requires coverage of drugs and devices that can cause an abortion, the mandate, including the expansion of the mandate to include OTC contraceptives, violates ACA provisions dealing with abortion coverage and non-preemption of state law, as well as the Weldon amendment.
The full text of the comments is available here
See: 89 Fed. Reg. 85750 (Oct. 28, 2024).
Booth 203
GOLD SPONSOR
State Litigation
Maine Supreme Court Denies Removal of Statute of Limitations for Child Sex Abuse Claims
The Supreme Court of Maine held that the Maine Constitution bars legislative revival of causes of action after it has been expired by a previous existing statute of limitations. This decision arose from the Maine legislature removing any limitation period for sexual acts towards minors. Thirteen plaintiffs sued the Bishop of Portland with clergy sexual abuse claims that occurred when they were children but had been expired under the prior statute of limitations. The court determined that “[o] nce a statute of limitations has expired for a claim, a right to be free of that claim has vested, and the claim cannot be revived.” Notably, the court quoted the Mitchell v. Roberts opinion from the Utah Supreme Court, which also denied the retroactive elimination of a statute of limitations. 43 F.4th 1074 (10th Cir. 2022) States remain split on the issue of retroactively eliminating statutes of limitations for sexual abuse claims.
Moving forward, Plaintiffs’ attorney is still seeking to bring claims under fraudulent concealment and other actions against the Diocese of Portland, which could extend the time limit for statute of limitations. –S.E.
See: Dupuis v. Roman Cath. Bishop of Portland, 2025 WL 310876 (Me. Jan. 28, 2025).
As an independent investment office serving faith-based organizations, Hirtle Callaghan understands the unique concerns that motivate Catholic investors. We build and manage custom portfolios to meet clients’ unique investment goals and objectives, including tailored private equity solutions that respect Catholic Values and adhere to USCCB SRI Guidelines.
FUTURE ASSOCIATION MEETINGS
Diocesan Fiscal Management Conference (DFMC)
September 28-October 1, 2025
PHILADELPHIA, PA - Philadelphia Marriott Downtown
September 27-30, 2026
LOUISVILLE, KY - Omni Louisville Hotel
September 26-29, 2027
DALLAS, TX - Sheraton Dallas
Diocesan Information Systems Conference (DISC) Canon Law Society of America (CLSA)
October 13-16, 2025
ORLANDO, FL - The Doubletree by Hilton SeaWorld
June 24-26, 2025
NASHVILLE, TN - Loews Vanderbilt Hotel
September 15-18, 2025
ANAHEIM, CA - Disneyland Hotel
International Catholic Stewardship Council (ICSC) Catholic Cemetery Conference (CCC) Conference for Catholic Facility Management (CCFM)
September 21-24, 2025
CHICAGO, IL - Hyatt Regency Chicago
Kansas City, MO - Westin Crown Center National Association of Church Personnel Administrators (NACPA)
April 27-29, 2025
SALT LAKE CITY, UT - Marriott City Center
April 27-30, 2025
Covington, KY - Cincinnati Marriott at River Center
April 26-29, 2026
A benefit of the electronic version is that it is easier to navigate.
Click on any item in the Table of Contents and you will be taken directly to the corresponding article.
Also, click on any of the ads from our diocesan Platinum and Gold partners and you will be taken to their website or email for immediate assistance!
The Herald Publication Schedule:
The Herald will accept notices and articles for future issues according to the following schedule:
